John Carter of Mars

**vancak** · March 10, 2012, 03:29pm

I just got back from JC, and it was awesome! Anyone who gave this movie a bad review is an idiot. It was very well done, and you wouldn't even know that it was a Disney movie (kinda reminds me of "The Rocketeer"-done by Disney, but you wouldn't know it). As a previous poster stated, it's a mix of "Princess of Mars" and elements of "Gods of Mars". The movie is a very good adaptation of the books, and Lynn Collins-yeah, I think I'm in love. The acting was quite good and the story overshadows the FX. Lots of times, movies use big effects to cover up a bad script. The FX in JC just enhance the story. I highly recommend this movie. In fact, those of us here on the Org should especially like it.

**Dr Kain** · March 10, 2012, 08:48pm

Well I saw the movie and if you hated Attack of the Clones, do not watch this. It is pretty much the same movie, just with new visuals, boring characters (Mark Strong is the only character I liked), and acting that is just as bad. The movie is long, very long, and it does not feel like anything is happening in the middle of it. The visual are good, the 3D rocks, but that is all I can say about it. The music starts out really good when it is on Earth, but then it gets bland when John goes to Mars, and gets good again when the movie goes back to Earth. It is very inconsistent and like I said, the movie does nothing new. Yes, I understand it was new when the book was first written, but with the hundreds of science fiction stories out there, this movie does nothing to stand out. And while you can argue that fact, look at Lord of the Rings. There have been hundreds of fantasy movies, and yet, Peter Jackson still made Lord of the Rings a cinematic masterpiece despite the themes having been done in movies before. I will say one thing, this movie is way better than Avatar.

**Pixel Dan** · March 10, 2012, 10:17pm

Originally Posted by Dr Kain

Well I saw the movie and if you hated Attack of the Clones, do not watch this. It is pretty much the same movie, just with new visuals, boring characters (Mark Strong is the only character I liked), and acting that is just as bad.

I strongly disagree with this assessment. But, to each their own.

I thought the movie was fantastic! It was exciting, the visuals were great, and I really enjoyed the story. I'd definitely recommend checking it out!

**gbagok** · March 10, 2012, 11:10pm

Okay, just saw this movie today and I'm kind of shocked that the reviewers say what they do about it. "Imaginatively bankrupt"?!! There's gross misstatements, and then there's just criminal deception. I know it's all subjective, and I admit I'm often amazed at others' impressions of things I liked, but some of the reviews I've read just couldn't be more off the mark. Some even read like spite, but that's for Stanton to wrestle with I guess. After years of George Lucas proving critics right about his shortcomings, it's like they just got used to hating on this kind of movie. By no means is John Carter perfect--I disagree that they earned an artistic reason for not calling it John Carter of Mars. In fact really by the end the movie itself even makes the case for it to be called EXACTLY that and not simply "John Carter". But even with a lesser title this is the movie that Prince of Persia and Sorcerer's Apprentice really wished they were. I felt almost as enchanted as I did by Jackson's Lord of the Rings. If there's anything that holds it back it's that it's not as big a movie and I can't count on follow ups in the next two years. If the naysayers have their way, I won't see any ever, and in a world where Wrath of the Titans and three freaking Underworld sequels exist, I find that completely unacceptable.

I really loved Lyn Collins as Dejah Thoris. She was the break out star for me. Kitsch was less successful, but still a very good lead--better than I feared he would be. It's sad though that I don't think he comes alive as well as say Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn. At one point he's recognized as a Virginian because he says "Sir" when addressing someone. But with Kitsch's delivery, the "sir" sounded forced and I don't think he ever tried for an accent.

I could nitpick it to death of course. It's silly for Earth to be larger in the Marsian sky than the moon is in our own. The epic VO intro while it featured some of my favorite visuals felt like a misstep that too many Sci-Fi/Fantasy movies (Green Lantern?) seem to make. I didn't have a problem with Carter's super powers (Superman did used to do the same thing, he couldn't originally fly, and so basically John Carter is an Earthman who becomes Superman on another planet--I can buy that fine), although I thought Carter was pushed around too much by people he was supposed to be able to easily overpower. Even with his powers he looked unlikely to be so effective against an army of fighters with twice as many limbs as him. Sure they're all built like twigs, but he's not very substantial either. If Mickey Rourke had wandered in from the Immortals, I think he could have broken him with his pinky.

Speaking of guys good at playing villains, I really loved the presence of Dominc West as Sab Than and Mark Strong (villain for hire) as Matai Shang, but I really felt they were not utilized enough. I wanted more of a punch at the end, but the rivalry between Carter and Than was almost nonexistent. Tal Hajis had a more personal rivalry with Carter honestly, and Hajis is like a third-tier villain in this. Carter's final fight with Than was very anticlimactic, and of course Shang being like Palpatine in Star Wars just escapes in a shimmer. There's no visceral triumph of good over evil, and I missed having one a lot. I loved Avatar, and I think if it hadn't planted those big arrows in Quarritch's heart after several hours of making me want to see him go down, I'd have been mad. The villains here just aren't so prominent, and I want a prominent villain in my fantasy action/adventure. A Masters of the Universe movie should not emulate that mistake. You can have that kind of victory and still save more for a sequel. I've heard people compare this to Star Wars, but there's nothing like that final suicidal trench battle and the climactic explosion to pay off the build up (let the Freudianism commence).

Anyway, back to my original point, I enjoyed this a lot. I think I'll grow to love this like I love all the classics. Great movies, in my opinion, grow on you. I don't think I'll ever love a movie on a first viewing the way I love Star Wars, Casablanca, Raiders, Alien/s, Lawrence of Arabia, or Conan now. But John Carter is off to a great start. I hope we can get the sequels of course, I'm kind of sick of promising franchises being stillborn.

**markatisu** · March 11, 2012, 11:46am

If it does well internationally there will be a sequel, Disney's main focus for the past 3 years has been widening the International market (they earn more $$$ that way since distribution deals work differently overseas)

Examples of this are the latest Pirates movie and CARS 2, both of which earned monsterous money overseas compared to their US grosses. Of course they were not "bad" or "bombs" here so its not exactly a fair comparison given that John Carter may fail to break $100m if word of mouth does not hold

**Dr Kain** · March 11, 2012, 12:17pm

Just to clarify, I didn't hate it, I was just frustrated with it. I went in with low expectations and still came out disappointed. There were so many good ideas in there hidden by bad acting and redundant concepts. LIke I said, I could not get into any of the characters outside of one, and with that, it makes it hard to really enjoy what is going on or what they are doing on screen. I feel the princess was completely miscast, and to be honest, the actor playing John felt too clean for being a Virginian during the time of the Civil War. Plus, they went too comedic at times, especially with his ability to jump hundreds of feet on Mars, which was really stretching the concept. If it had been a made up world, I would have been cool with it. However, it being Mars, its just is not possible to do that. I also could not figure out who is who, and why people are called reds. They never explained that and all I kept thinking was Red vs Blue, just without the armor.

As for why I compare it to Attack of the Clones, the entire last half of the movie just screamed it. Desert-like planet, arena combat, speeders, a wedding, a sword battle with a disarming (literally), villians hiding behind the scenes, etc. Speaking of the arena scene, there is battle they were building up, and it is over in maybe half a second, and it was more of an off-screen kill. WHich also bothered me, this movie really played it safe on everything. Maybe that is my biggest gripe, and why I could not get into it, everything was done so that people would not get offended with anything.

However, I would have to say, despite that I did not enjoy the movie, it is still better than anything I have seen this year thus far.

**GeologyMule** · March 11, 2012, 01:56pm

Originally Posted by gbagok

I could nitpick it to death of course. It's silly for Earth to be larger in the Marsian sky than the moon is in our own.

Mars has two moons, Phobos and Deimos. That is what you saw in the horizon.

**krosfyah** · March 11, 2012, 03:13pm

haven't gone yet, i'm feeling sick.

**gbagok** · March 11, 2012, 03:59pm

Originally Posted by GeologyMule

Mars has two moons, Phobos and Deimos. That is what you saw in the horizon.

Was it? I thought they specifically talk about Earth when they show the heavenly bodies--also aren't Phobos and Deimos irregularly shaped? The ones I saw looked more spherical.

**Southzen** · March 11, 2012, 04:41pm

Saw it last night and loved it. A great film to open the spring movie season.

**SCB** · March 11, 2012, 05:12pm

Nice job clarifying how you didn't hate the movie Dr. Kain.

**EldestSon** · March 11, 2012, 06:08pm

Originally Posted by GeologyMule

Mars has two moons, Phobos and Deimos. That is what you saw in the horizon.

i just got back from seeing this and i was about to give this answer.

anyway, i liked this a lot more than avatar. 50% of critics (according to RT) got this wrong.

**Southzen** · March 11, 2012, 06:10pm

Originally Posted by SCB

Nice job clarifying how you didn't hate the movie Dr. Kain.

Also thanks for clarifying how a 100 year old book copied attack of the clones, when in fact, Lucas admited decades ago he was heavily inspired by ER Burrows.

**He-Dad** · March 11, 2012, 06:23pm

I had never even heard of John Carter till the previews came out. Was still pretty clueless and had no interest in seeing it till I started reading the boards here (trying to avoid too many of the spoiler ones of course!) Now I'm pumped to see it. Can't make it this weekend but will be going this week and will more than likely be adding my 2 cents afterwards. Probably gonna have to try and find the book series its based on too. Then only Princess of Mars thing I've ever heard of was that low budget SyFy channel type movie and that looked awful so I had assumed it was something like that. Looks like I was wrong! Thanks org-ers for sparking my interest!

**wyldman11** · March 11, 2012, 06:31pm

Originally Posted by He-Dad

I had never even heard of John Carter till the previews came out. Was still pretty clueless and had no interest in seeing it till I started reading the boards here (trying to avoid too many of the spoiler ones of course!) Now I'm pumped to see it. Can't make it this weekend but will be going this week and will more than likely be adding my 2 cents afterwards. Probably gonna have to try and find the book series its based on too. Then only Princess of Mars thing I've ever heard of was that low budget SyFy channel type movie and that looked awful so I had assumed it was something like that. Looks like I was wrong! Thanks org-ers for sparking my interest!

Syfy is known for finding out someone is going to make a movie then producing a low budget movie using the same idea/themes, more specifically Asylum. Princess of Mars is in the public domain because the copyright has expired. Asylum saw that Disney was making a big screen adaptation of the movie so they made their own version. A foundation based on the Authors name has trademarked several phrases dealing with the story to try to keep some control.

I have been meaning to read the books, in fact I think I am going to project gutenberg now.

**GeologyMule** · March 11, 2012, 06:34pm

For those with a Kindle, you can download "A Princess of Mars" for free from Amazon.

**He-Dad** · March 11, 2012, 06:39pm

thanx for the tip, breaking out my kindle now!

**wyldman11** · March 11, 2012, 07:14pm

I have the nook, and that's probably one of those 10 different copies all for .99-2.99 books. That is one of the advantages of the kindle a better selection of free books. But many of them can be found on something like project gutenberg so.

**BlueStreak** · March 11, 2012, 08:07pm

My wife and I saw it today and we both really enjoyed it. The story is good, the actors are well cast - especially Lynn Collins. I knew nothing of the story coming into the movie, but I think i'll go back and read the books now.

I like how the villain really isn't the villain and I really liked Marc Strong's character. The set design (digital or otherwise) was very well done. Lots of vision went into this film. Yes, there will be the Attack of the Clones references, but they're really short sighted. JC's arena scene is vastly different than AOTC.

Overall - this film entertained me, and left me wanting more -

My one parting thought - Lynn Collins should be cast as the next Wonder Woman.

**Krueger** · March 11, 2012, 08:11pm

Saw it. Loved it. A bit confusing and muddled at times, but pretty solid nonetheless. The effects were amazing. The Tharks crap all over the Na’vi. Plus, the ending was killer. This film really deserves to find an audience.

Looks like its going to be a colossal failure domestically, but all is not lost just yet. It can still safe face overseas, where it seems to be doing very well thus far. It’s taken over 70 million overseas. So worldwide it’s already made 100 million. I think DVD and Blu Ray sales will be pretty solid for this. It will probably end up just being a minor failure, as appose to a humongous flop.

A shame, because it was actually a decent film. Also, I thought the 3D was very well done for being a conversion. Quite surprised.

**markatisu** · March 11, 2012, 09:17pm

Interesting article all fans of this movie should read

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/12/bu...ted=1&_r=1&hpw

It gives some insight on how things ended up the way they did and might shed some light on the films struggles in marketing/development

Plus he had 2 sequels lined up

Originally Posted by Krueger

Saw it. Loved it. A bit confusing and muddled at times, but pretty solid nonetheless. The effects were amazing. The Tharks crap all over the Na’vi. Plus, the ending was killer. This film really deserves to find an audience.

Looks like its going to be a colossal failure domestically, but all is not lost just yet. It can still safe face overseas, where it seems to be doing very well thus far. It’s taken over 70 million overseas. So worldwide it’s already made 100 million. I think DVD and Blu Ray sales will be pretty solid for this. It will probably end up just being a minor failure, as appose to a humongous flop.

A shame, because it was actually a decent film. Also, I thought the 3D was very well done for being a conversion. Quite surprised.

High international sales, positive fan reviews/word of mouth will show Disney they just majorly messed up the advertising and that the movie was good they just did not do it correctly. Of course if that report is anyone close it has a LOOOOOONG way to go internationally

Its rare that a film bombs in the US and is a massive hit overseas, lately only the Narnia series has had that kind of reception.

**Krueger** · March 11, 2012, 10:11pm

Originally Posted by markatisu

Interesting article all fans of this movie should read

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/12/bu...ted=1&_r=1&hpw

It gives some insight on how things ended up the way they did and might shed some light on the films struggles in marketing/development.

From past interviews with Stanton relating to John Carter (where he say’s, for example, that “we do this better than live-action guys”), it’s quite clear that his arrogance and ego had a big part to play in John Carter’s overblown budget. I’ve said this from day one. I admire the man as an artist, but he really didn’t do his reputation any favours in interviews for the film, because he continuously came across as very arrogant, cocksure and (very) dismissive. For example, he said in a very recent interview when asked about the budget that he doesn't care about budgets, and that was the end of it. Well, you should care Mr. Stanton, as that's a part of your job. Of course, a lot of that is also Disney’s fault for not standing up to him, which is what a studio is supposed to do. Maybe they thought they “owed him” with all the success he has given them in the past with Pixar, so they thought it was okay to indulge his every whim. Still, he clearly needed reeling in, which Disney failed to do. Stanton is evidently not completely innocent here.

**King Kahn** · March 11, 2012, 10:25pm

Saw the movie today and liked it. I see A LOT of things ripped off from this story for the SW prequels which is a shame since they are done better (and first) in this story, and those people that don't like the prequels will be put off going to see the movie because of it.

Is it perfect? no. There are some corny parts and cheesy dialog but ALL sci-fi movies(and a lot of other types of movies as well like romance movies) have that but I will forgive it.

I do hope this movie gets the sequels that are planned as I really liked the world they were able to create.

Originally Posted by GeologyMule

I had a hard time at first distinguishing the two humanoid races involved in the civil war. They dressed the same, same weapons, look, with the only difference being blue and red. I never really understood who/what the main antagonist was really up to.

Welcome to US politics lol ZING!!!

**EldestSon** · March 11, 2012, 10:48pm

Originally Posted by King Kahn

Saw the movie today and liked it. I see A LOT of things ripped off from this story for the SW prequels which is a shame since they are done better (and first) in this story, and those people that don't like the prequels will be put off going to see the movie because of it.

please explain.

**King Kahn** · March 11, 2012, 11:51pm

The Attack of the Clones had the arena battle which was based off of the mars books for one.

Then there are just basic tones and character points that make up the DNA of some of the SW characters and plots.

Thread: John Carter of Mars

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Posting Permissions